From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38242) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wFo-0005Wp-Pr for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:15:38 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wFk-0004ER-Gg for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:15:32 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:41208) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1e1wFk-0004Dl-5K for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 10 Oct 2017 11:15:28 -0400 Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2017 16:15:13 +0100 From: "Daniel P. Berrange" Message-ID: <20171010151513.GK30015@redhat.com> Reply-To: "Daniel P. Berrange" References: <1726032a-16fb-3eae-1dbf-f711d4e98a5a@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1726032a-16fb-3eae-1dbf-f711d4e98a5a@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] updating to a u-boot without the case-sensitive filename clash List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: Peter Maydell , QEMU Developers , Thomas Huth , Alexander Graf , Michael Roth On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 10:06:35AM -0500, Eric Blake wrote: > On 10/10/2017 09:22 AM, Peter Maydell wrote: > > Hi; we currently have an issue with the u-boot we're using where it > > has a file and a directory that differ only in case (scripts/Kconfig > > and scripts/kconfig/). This means that QEMU's release tarballs won't > > unpack on a case-insensitive filesystem (OSX, Windows). > > > > u-boot have now fixed this upstream: > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=610eec7f0593574c034054ba54fc1c934755e208 > > > > but we need to decide how best to get this fix into QEMU so that > > our tarballs will unpack, both for the upcoming QEMU 2.11 and > > ideally for future point releases based on 2.10. > > > > I can see a couple of options: > > (1) wait for next u-boot release (scheduled for Nov 13, 2017), > > and move to that > > [downsides: would be in the middle of QEMU's own release cycle, > > pretty late to fix any problems with the new version; > > rather a big change to put into stable] > > (2) move to u-boot current head-of-unstable > > [downsides: would mean running some random git commit version, > > also not really very suitable for stable] > > (3) backport the upstream fix to sit on top of the u-boot version > > we're currently using (I think the patch should apply as-is) > > [downsides: would need to figure out how to get that commit into > > the mirror of the u-boot repo that we use; would a build of it > > claim a misleading u-boot version number?] > > (4) suggest your better idea here! > > > > Thoughts? > > half-and-half? Use option (1) for 2.11 (that is, wait for November's > release there), but option (3) for 2.10.2 (that is, backport just the > fix onto the u-boot version uses in 2.10.x right now)? (I'm not sure > I'm a fan of the idea of split maintenance like that, but am throwing it > out as a possible (4) since you asked). There's always the "do nothing" option for the stable branch too. It isn't nice but there is a workaround, which we could easily publicise on the '/download/' page of the website until 2.11 comes out Regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|